Commented TiVo, fearful that the new requirements would lead to CTPs locking it out, "If each cable operator deploys set-top boxes with its own understanding of an open industry standard, the result may be an outcome that is neither standard nor open."

The FCC listened and now it's come back with a revised version of the plan, which makes it clear the CTPs can deploy their own "open" standards as they wish, but the standards must be well-documented and easy enough that PC and set-top box makers could implement them on the receiver side with no contact with the cable provider.

[Image Source: Streaming Media Hosting]

The new set of rules, set to be made mandatory by June 2, 2014, also clarifies what capabilities are expected of the HD streams:

recordable high-definition video

closed captioning data

service discovery

video transport

remote control command pass-through

DLNA Premium Video Profile, an HD-compliant version of the secure-streaming standard set to be ratified in 2013, was suggested as one possible option for cable companies.

A minor caveat is that small CTPs, with less than 400,000 customers, will get an additional 3 months to comply with the ruling (they will have to be compliant by Sept. 2, 2014).

Not true at all. If you do not own the building in urban centers most of the time you are not allowed to have a dish installed. For example: I own my loft, but I cannot mount a dish to get satellite service because I do not own the exterior structure that my loft is contained within. So, if I want any kind of television, I have only one choice: Comcast. Which sucks because the basic HD package (no movie channels) is nearly $170 per month. Plus my cable has gone up $2-5 in price every month for the last 2 years and the only other solution is no tv service at all.

That isn't a cable, satellite, or FCC issue. That's a complaint you have with your landlord.

There's no reason the owner of your building couldn't have Dish and/or Direct installed on the roof and use the buildings existing networking to hook your loft's drops up to any number of providers. Hell, Dish or Direct might even be willing to pay for the install to gain the customers.

And this is where you failed to comprehend what I typed... I OWN Read that: OWN my loft, its considered a condo. Therefore I do not have a landlord . You cannot have a dish installed on the structure of a condo because as an condo owner you do not own anything from the drywall out. If you owned a condo in a (key words:) urban center you would know exactly what I am talking about, but you obviously do not. Most urban centers consist of buildings 4+ stories tall, with somewhere between 10-20 units per floor. As I said, you cannot have a dish installed onto something you do not own. Dish, directv etc will absolutely not, again WILL NOT install onto a structure you do not own. Its against the law.

Now say under your misunderstood view, If perhaps I rented, I would have to get permission from the PROPERTY MANAGEMENT company to have a dish put in. In that scenario a landlord would act a liaison between the renter and the company that owns the building. But that basically does not happen, because I could just imagine what the roof of a building would look like with 300+ dishes on the roof. Seriously don't chime in on when you have no idea what you're talking about.

I would go that route, but I do like the local news... and because we have 2 choices for high speed. 1)century link $100 for 7mb down, 256k up or comcast another $150 a month for 30mb down, 7 up (which is what I pay for) with no bundles offered here. Monopolies are great aren't they?

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer